Consensus Development Conference

Abstract

A pair of consensus development conferences held in the United States and in Sweden presented an unusual opportunity for a cross-cultural study of technology transfer The two conferences were based on the same topic and the same set ofprocedures, providing a chance to test the replicability of the concept of the consensus development conference in different cultures with different health care systems. The purpose of the study was to compare the two experiences, addressing the following questions (I) Can the consensus development process operate across cultural differences and still yield similar results ? (2) Do differences in the health payment system effect the consensus development process ? The study concluded that the consensus development conference is an effective technology transfer procedure both in the United States and in Sweden. The process was effective regardless of differences in language, culture, and health care delivery systems Conclusions reached by consensus development panels regarding the safety and efficacy of the technology were similar Inclusion of issues of need and cost at the Swedish conference expanded the agenda beyond that of the U S conference, however the consensus development process remained the same

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allison, G.T. (1971) The Essence of Decision Explaining the Cuban Missle Crisis Boston

Little, Brown

Banta, H.D. ( 1980) "The diffusion of the computed tomography (CT) scanner in the United States." Int. J. of Health Services 10: 251-269.

Den Kongsjorda Hoften (1982) Stockholm: Swedish Medical Research Council, and SPRI.

Fiedler, J. ( 1978) Field Research A Manual for Logistics and Management of Scientific Studies in Natural Settings San Francisco . Jossey-Bass

Gross, N. , J.B. Giacquinta , and M. Bernstein (1971) Implementing Organizational Innovation New York. Basic Books.

Jick, T.D. (1971) "Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods. triangulation in action" Admm Sci Q 24 602-611.

Levine, S. ( 1975) "Diffusion of medical technology. policy considerations and overview," in G Gordon and G L Fisher (eds ) The Diffusion of Medical Technology Cambridge, MA. Ballinger

Lowe, C.U. (1981) "Consensus development programs theory, process, and critique." Presented at the symposium on Resolving Regulatory Issues Involving Science and Technology, Washington and Lee University , April

Mfr and Spri ( 1982) Total Hip Joint Replacement Consensus Conference Stockholm Author.

10.

National Institute of Health (NIH) (1982) Consensus Development Conference Statement Total Hip Joint Replacement Bethesda, MD: Author

11.

——— (n.d.) NIH Consensus Development Washington, DC

OMAR, and U S Department of Health and Human Services

12.

Office for Medical Applications of Research [OMAR] (1981) OMAR Information Sheet Washington, DC. Author.

13.

President's Biomedical Research Panel (1976 ) Report Washington, DC Department of Health, Education and Welfare (publication 057-76-500)

14.

Pressman, J.L. and A. Wildavsky (1973) Implementation Berkeley, CA : Univ of California Press.

15.

Rogers, E.M. , J.K. Larsen , and C.U. Lowe (1982) "The consensus development process for medical technologies. a cross-cultural comparison of Sweden and the United States " J of the Amer. Medical Association 248, 15.

16.

Scannel, J G et al. (1971) "Optimal resources for cardiac surgery " Circulation 221-236

17.

Schatzman, L. and A.L. Strauss ( 1973) Field Research Strategies for a Natural Sociology Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Prentice-Hall

18.

Shell, E.R. (1981) "CAT fever a questionable prognosis " Technology Rev 23-26

19.

Yin, R.K. (1981a) "The case study crisis: some answers " Admin Sci Qu 26 58-65

20.

——— (1981b) "The case study as a serious research strategy " Knowledge 3, 1: 97-114